BackgroundTelemedicine applications have been increasing due to the development of new computer science technologies and of more advanced telemedical devices. Various types of telerehabilitation treatments and their relative intensities and duration have been reported.ObjectiveThe objective of this review is to provide a detailed overview of the rehabilitation techniques for remote sites (telerehabilitation) and their fields of application, with analysis of the benefits and the drawbacks related to use. We discuss future applications of telerehabilitation techniques with an emphasis on the development of high-tech devices, and on which new tools and applications can be used in the future.MethodsWe retrieved relevant information and data on telerehabilitation from books, articles and online materials using the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) “telerehabilitation,” “telemedicine,” and “rehabilitation,” as well as “disabling pathologies.”ResultsTelerehabilitation can be considered as a branch of telemedicine. Although this field is considerably new, its use has rapidly grown in developed countries. In general, telerehabilitation reduces the costs of both health care providers and patients compared with traditional inpatient or person-to-person rehabilitation. Furthermore, patients who live in remote places, where traditional rehabilitation services may not be easily accessible, can benefit from this technology. However, certain disadvantages of telerehabilitation, including skepticism on the part of patients due to remote interaction with their physicians or rehabilitators, should not be underestimated.ConclusionsThis review evaluated different application fields of telerehabilitation, highlighting its benefits and drawbacks. This study may be a starting point for improving approaches and devices for telerehabilitation. In this context, patients’ feedback may be important to adapt rehabilitation techniques and approaches to their needs, which would subsequently help to improve the quality of rehabilitation in the future. The need for proper training and education of people involved in this new and emerging form of intervention for more effective treatment can’t be overstated.

Background: This study has assessed the dental hygiene habits and problems of seafarers and their attitudes/perceptions regarding oral hygiene using a dental hygiene/habits questionnaire.

No abstract

Background and Objectives: The aims of this systematic review were to identify additional infection control measures implemented in dental practice globally to prevent cross-infection and evaluate the psychological impacts of the pandemic among dental professionals. Materials and Methods: A sequential systematic literature search was conducted from December 2019 to 30 April 2020 through PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, Google Scholar, Embase, and Web of Science databases. The search yielded the following results: “COVID-19” (n = 12,137), “Novel corona virus” (n = 63), “COVID-19 and dentistry” (n = 46), “COVID-19 and oral health” (n = 41), “Novel Corona virus and Dentistry” (n = 0), “dental health and Novel Coronavirus” (n = 26), and “dental practice and Novel Coronavirus” (n = 6). Results: After a careful review and eliminating articles based on inclusion and exclusion criteria, the final review included 13 articles. Management of infection control is discussed extensively in the literature and remains the main theme of many Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) articles on dentistry. Telephone triage using a questionnaire, hand hygiene, personal protective equipment (PPE) for clinical and nonclinical staff, a preprocedural mouth rinse, and aerosol management have been discussed and implemented in few countries. Three studies recommended that elective treatments for patients with a temperature of >100.4 F or 38 °C should be postponed or performed in an airborne infection isolation room (AIIR) or negative-pressure room. Limiting the number of patients in the waiting area, the removal of shared objects, proper ventilation, and physical distancing were highly recommended. Psychological distress among dental professionals in relation to existing medical conditions and self-efficacy has been discussed. Conclusions: Although the COVID-19 pandemic has had a substantial impact on the dental profession worldwide, our review highlights many practice management approaches to adopt the new norm. More research highlighting evidence-based safety practices and multisectoral collaboration is required to help dental professionals make informed decisions and make the profession safe, both for the patient and dental professionals.